CA will not speak to me

[TJN66]

I got a letter in the mail from the Law offices of John P. Fry in Roanoke, VA on 6-30-08. (I live in NY.) The CA then called my parents house on 7-1-08. I called them back. (No they did not try to reach me at my own home.)

I then got chewed out by one of the CA on how I was a dead beat and I needed to take care of this bill. That I did not need to send a dv letter as I owe the money. I promptly told her that I will not be spoken to like that and hung up.

I called back asking for the original person that called for me. I spoke to him and he told me that if I send a debt validation letter then he would no longer be able to speak to me and that the account would be moved farther along in the collection status. Although when pressed he could not tell me what the next step is.

I spoke to him and told him that I am not some dead beat. I have in fact paid off 4 major bills in the last 6 months. He said that he is he was willing to work with me and I am more than willing to work with him after I get the debt validation completed. And he again told me that if I went ahead and sent the letter he could no longer speak with me.

Is this correct? I was under the impression that all I was asking for was proof that this CA is the one I need to pay. Or are they lying to me?

Thank you so much,

Tammy

[swirlgirl]

They are just using their CA tactics. Go ahead and send the DV letter. You need to consider what your next step will be should they send reasonable validation.

[Freak]

I then got chewed out by one of the CA on how I was a dead beat and I needed to take care of this bill. That I did not need to send a dv letter as I owe the money. I promptly told her that I will not be spoken to like that and hung up.

I called back asking for the original person that called for me. I spoke to him and he told me that if I send a debt validation letter then he would no longer be able to speak to me and that the account would be moved farther along in the collection status. Although when pressed he could not tell me what the next step is.

I spoke to him and told him that I am not some dead beat. I have in fact paid off 4 major bills in the last 6 months. He said that he is he was willing to work with me and I am more than willing to work with him after I get the debt validation completed. And he again told me that if I went ahead and sent the letter he could no longer speak with me.

First, don't fall for letting them call you names. It will upset you, and you'll say stuff that they twist and use against you to get you more frustrated: "If you had money to pay the other six, why not pay us too? Apparently, you have money."

Secondly, do not let their tactics dictate your plan. If everyone did as the CA said, their job would be a breeze. They are trying to use the average consumer's ignorance against you. The DV process is there for a reason. If you send it, they have to validate it. Period. They can move it up as far as they want, but collection activity must stop until they validate the debt. Keep good records of everything you do.

[TJN66]

Thank you so much. I thought this was how it all worked but he had me fooled for a bit but not anymore.

Tammy

[Freak]

Keep in mind, that it is there job to "fool" you. It is how they make their money. There is so much help on this site to help you. If you study it, ask questions when you need additional help, and follow the advice you read, you'll be well on your way to better credit.

[debtorshusband]

I spoke to him and he told me that if I send a debt validation letter then he would no longer be able to speak to me ...

That's partly right. He won't be able to talk to you until they have provided validation.

...and that the account would be moved farther along in the collection status. Although when pressed he could not tell me what the next step is.

Since they are a law firm, the want you to infer that the next step is a lawsuit. However, since they are in Virginia and you are in New York, that's probably not even an option. Probably the actual "next step" is they give up and send the account on to another Collection Agency.

Or are they lying to me?

How could you even think such a thing?!?!

DH

[hiblues]

The DV process is there for a reason. If you send it, they have to validate it. Period.

with a very large exception...

the CA is only required by law to

honor your DV if you do it within 30 days of first contact.

(Phone call or mail to last known address)

If you are outside that 30 day window,

they can legally ignore your request for DV and still

keep on with collection activities.

HiB

[Freak]

Good point HiB

I'm thinking "locally."

[TJN66]

The letter that I was sent is dated 6/30/08. The DV is going out this week. I just need to type it up.

Thank you so much for all your help.

Tammy

[Robert Nashville/Savannah]

....the CA is only required by law to

honor your DV if you do it within 30 days of first contact.

(Phone call or mail to last known address)

A couple of points here….

One is that I’m unsure what you mean by “honor” a request for validation.

A CA is never required to respond to a DV at all if they don’t wish to do so…all the law requires, as I understand it, is that if a DV is timely, then the CA must stop collection activity until the do validate (by extension, if they never validate after receipt of a timely DV then they can never continue collection activity).

Other point is with regards to the “last known address” reference.

What is the responsibility of the CA, if any, to try and ensure that the address they have for a consumer is current?

Similar question, for purposes of the thirty-day clock, is “initial contact” as defined by the FDCPA when the initial dunning letter is “sent”, regardless of what address is used, or is “initial contact” the point in time that the consumer is truly first contacted by (i.e. letter received from) the CA?

I would suggest no matter how many letters are sent, “initial contact” hasn’t happened until the consumer actually receives one of them (or becomes aware of the CA’s collection activities in some other way).

Now, if the consumer is actively trying to “hide”, that would be a totally different matter. But, if the consumer has done the normal things (change of address with the USPS, kept his/her credit bureau reports address data up-to-date, etc, I would think that a CA would have a hard time arguing that their sending a dunning letter to an address that hasn’t been current for two or three or four years would hardly count as “initial contact”; especially if the CA had the current address available to them (such as by pulling the consumer’s credit report).

I’d appreciate hearing your thoughts and my apologies to the OP for high-jacking the thread!